- From: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2008 09:12:54 -0400
- To: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
- cc: Ian Horrocks <ian.horrocks@comlab.ox.ac.uk>, Michael Schneider <schneid@fzi.de>, W3C OWL Working Group <public-owl-wg@w3.org>
> Ian Horrocks wrote:
> >>
> >> * 1.2.1
> >>
> >> """
> >> An OWL 2 RL entailment checker
> >> [...] MUST return True only when O1 entails O2,
> >> and it must return False
> >> only when FO(O1) ? R does not entail FO(O2)
> >> under the standard first-order semantics
> >> """
> >>
>
> This is again a naming issue, a bit like Michael's question on how to
> refer to RDF vs. model theoretical semantics. But what exactly do we
> mean here by 'standard first order semantics'? I have an idea, for sure,
> but we may have to at least put a clear reference here... (RIF?)
Yeah, I hope we can transition the rules to being written in RIF and
just use a RIF reference. Someone needs to do that work, though.
-- Sandro
Received on Wednesday, 3 September 2008 13:14:26 UTC